Housing, housing, housing
Early in this century, the focus for managing growth in our largest capital cities was the recognition that new major rail corridors were needed. In the mid-2010s, the focus shifted to incorporating the proposed transport networks into metropolitan plans. In recent years, the narrative has shifted to housing, housing, housing, with policies such as the National Housing Accord, transport oriented development program in New South Wales, and Victoria’s housing statement.
Spinifex is an opinion column. If you would like to contribute, contact us to ask for a detailed brief.
For Melbourne, the activity centres program seeks to deliver 300,000 dwellings by 2051, and for Sydney, the transport oriented development program, including the mid-rise program, aims to deliver 230,000 dwellings over the next 15 years. These are important initiatives, equally important is to see the wider context, including the scale of population growth in the medium and long term and the implications of growth, such as the need for supporting infrastructure, like schools, and managing impacts, such as increased car travel.
Projected growth
Looking at the scale of growth, it is difficult to make comparisons as jurisdictions have differing projection periods and/or assumptions, which is potentially an area for federal government intervention. The Australian Bureau of Statistics has long term projections out to 2071 by state, with data on capital city proportions, though the boundary for Greater Sydney does not align with that of the NSW government. Projections of the NSW government only go out 16 years to 2041 and show additional population growth of around 933,500 people.
There are, however, no dwelling demand projections beyond a six year housing supply number, so an estimate based on household size suggests around 415,100 dwellings in 2041. Victoria has population and dwelling projections out to 2051, with the 2041 projections respectively around 2,074,800 and 901,900. Interestingly, Melbourne’s 2051 housing targets are around 23 per cent higher than the dwelling projections. All projections show Melbourne growing significantly larger than Sydney, a difference of around 863,000 by 2041.
Projected population and dwellings: Sydney and Melbourne
| Projection & source | 2021 | 2041 | Change 2021-41 | 2051 | Change 2021-51 | Change 2025 to 2065 | 2071 |
| Greater Sydney Population (ABS)* | 4,913,168 | 5,846,654 | 933,486 | 7,162,972 | 2,249,804 | 1,966,666 | 7,227,100 |
| Greater Sydney Population (NSW) | 4,783,395 | 6,125,288 | 1,341,893 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Greater Sydney Dwellings (ABS)** | 1,923,578 | 2,338,662 | 415,084 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Melbourne Population (ABS) | 4,976,157 | 6,762,075 | 1,785,918 | 7,472,683 | 2,496,526 | 2,989,755 | 8,658,700 |
| Melbourne Population (VIC) | 4,913,052 | 6,987,889 | 2,074,837 | 8,043,745 | 3,130,693 | N/A | N/A |
| Melbourne Dwellings (VIC) | 2,036,319 | 2,938,195 | 901,876 | 3,430,236 | 1,393,917 | N/A | N/A |
| Melbourne Housing Targets (VIC) | 1,714,000 |
** Estimate based on ABS projected household size
Taking a long term view – 40 years, the ABS projections (medium series) show significant continued growth for both cities, with Melbourne and Sydney’s additional growth for that period as around 2 million and 3 million people respectively. Noting also that the ABS projections are consistently lower than the state projections. The scale of this long term projected growth implies that the initiatives of both governments for homes around rail stations will need to be replicated well into the future.
Implications of growth
Now, looking at the wider city implications of growth, it is first insightful to provide some context for the scale projected. At the time of the 2021 ABS census, the population of metropolitan Perth was 2,116,647, around the size of the growth projected for Sydney over the next 40 years.
Similarly, at the same time, the population of Southeast Queensland was 3,758,965, somewhat larger than Melbourne’s projected growth, but provides a reasonable comparison. The significance of these comparisons is highlighted when the dynamics of the two cities are considered.
In the case of Perth, there are currently around 516 public schools and daily car travel of around 4.2 million trips. These two statistics alone suggest that when planning for the long term, it is important to connect residential development to the wide range of economic and social infrastructure investments that governments make, as well as allowing for the growth of the wide range of other goods, services and jobs that will be attracted to the city and facilitating mode share shifts away from private vehicles.
Understanding urban structure
This author investigates the spatial distribution of the economic and social infrastructure investments (assets) and related goods and services attributes that are within walking distance of all stations across the Melbourne and Sydney rail networks.
It reveals differences in their distribution on individual rail corridors. To support a shift away from car based trips, the research then assessed how many stations could provide residents with access to all the assets within 30 minutes by public transport, where a 30 minute trip is measured as 20 minutes by rail and a 5 minute walk at both ends.
The full list of assets assessed included: connect to Sydney CBD, major centre, top 20 retail centre, university campus, TAFE and/or university building, hospital, rail interchange, supermarket based centre, secondary school, primary school, library/community centre, recreation centre, playground, park bigger or equal to 0.5 hectare, and medical centre.
The results show that of the 183 stations across the Sydney rail network, there are only 51 from which all assets can be accessed within a 30 minute non car based trip. The 51 stations are in several clusters that can be reimagined as a linear transit city.
Beyond TOD – linear transit cities
There are numerous implications from these findings, including firstly, that significant economic and social infrastructure will be required over the short, medium and long term to support the projected growth in each city.
Secondly, if the transport congestion impacts of the projected growth is to be minimised, then the spatial distribution of the infrastructure investments will be critical, with the author’s research revealing that targeted investments could enhance the level of economic and social assets along individual rail corridors, thus enhancing accessibility without the need for car based trips.
Finally, a few points. The principal takeaway is that the proposed pathway for managing the spatial distribution of the projected dwelling demand needs to be explicitly coordinated with economic and social infrastructure investments to reduce car dependent trips, and the soon to be released paper outlines an urban renewal framework to manage this task. Such an approach can potentially influence a household’s cost of living by allowing a shift to single car households.
It is acknowledged that governments are allocating funds to support the projected growth, such as in Sydney, where $520 million is allocated for open space and transport initiatives. At the same time, it is suggested that in the context of squeezing Perth into Sydney and Melbourne, the recent cost for two public schools in Parramatta, Sydney (the Arthur Phillip High School and Parramatta Public School project package) is $225 million, highlighting the budgetary challenge of managing the projected scale of growth.
